Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sandbox/Poetry

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus. Woohookitty 20:45, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Sandbox/Poetry

  1. All the reasons given in Eloquence's post
  2. I've moved the content to the Poetry Wikicity.
  3. Poetry can already be added in Wikipedia:User pages, and linked by other's from there. JesseW 22:24, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Wikicities and protect from recreation JesseW 22:24, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEP. ‡ Jarlaxle 22:28, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Redirect, as above. Phoenix2 22:47, July 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Harmless fun. Dmn / Դմն 23:10, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • After reading the email, I agree with it. Redirect. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:50, 15 July 2005 (UTC) Delete. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 04:24, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
  • It would be too hard to find. They have a billion different mini-wikis all rolled into one giant wiki. ‡ Jarlaxle 00:54, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
    • Then, once the VFD is over, the admin who is moving it should let us know the new location, then yall can begin the linking on various pages here. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:58, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete -- The sandbox is for testing edits, and not an entertainment incubator for those who have tired of writing an encyclopedia. - Longhair | Talk 03:57, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete agree with Longhair. The sandbox should be used only for testing. JamesBurns 03:55, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
  • KeepQuit being a bunch of boring pansies. "This is an encyclopedia, blah blah blah," who cares. Quit taking life so seriously and go outside for a while, nerds. Just keep it.
  • I removed the speedy tag placed by the anon who wrote the post immediately above that brought me here and vote delete. I'm sure you can get more delete votes through speedy tags if you continue. - BanyanTree 18:59, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep great page!  Grue  18:22, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Weak delete, Wikipedia should not be a forum for fanfic or home-written stories or poems. Radiant_>|< 11:06, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete as per Erik's post and my previous votes on Sandobx games. Angela. 01:57, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep -- Earl Andrew - talk 06:20, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. If really necessary, move to a separate WikiProject like Wikiquote etc. If you guys can't be bothered to keep it here. --Mark J 16:57, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment: Mark, It Has Already Been Moved - see wikicities:c:poetry:Sandbox Poetry (from Wikipedia). I would love for you to volunteer to maintain, promote and add to it, but it's pretty clearly not part of an encyclopedia. JesseW 22:06, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment Encylopedias don't typically have sandboxes, either. Your reasoning, therefore, seems to indicate that you would support the deletion of Wikipedia:Sandbox or at least transwikiying it. Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 22:54, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
      • Comment Quite correct, YOu. ;-) I didn't fully explain what I meant. My reasoning (shared by many Wikipedians, AFAIK) is that Wikipedia should have two general categories of things:
        • encyclopedic material(i.e. the article and Category namespaces) and
        • material that helps us to write the encyclopedic material (i.e. the policy and guidelines pages, the WikiProject pages, the Template namespace, the User namespace(so we can communicate in public with each other regarding writing the encylopedic material) and the Sandbox(as a place for new users to try out the mechanisms we use to write the encyclopedia)).
      • Wikipedia:Sandbox/Poetry does not fit into either of these categories, and it has a specific place dedicated to it(the Poetry Wikicity) against which the only argument presented is that it is "too hard to find".
      • Regarding that argument, I think most people would be *much* more likely to look for a place to read and write Wiki Poetry in the list of Wikicities, or as a link from the poetry article(which I've just added), than to look in the place for newbies to try out the editing tools, i.e. the Sandbox. A subpage of the Sandbox is about the one of the least easy-to-find places I can think of. So I don't think the claim that the Poetry wikicity is "too hard to find" holds much water. And nobody has presented any other arguments against the Poetry wikicity. I hope this is a more complete explanation of my reasoning. JesseW 02:12, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
        • Comment Understood, but I stand by my vote. As I've said on the VFd's of other sections of the sandbox, if there is a "theme section" of the sandbox, it is an extension thereof for people to test editing by writing poetry (not that they can't in the regular sandbox, but I still see nothing wrong with it as an extension of the sandbox. Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 17:57, July 24, 2005 (UTC)
          • Well, this discussion is getting quite long, but it's interesting, so... "my vote" - I didn't see that you voted - did you mean to? The idea that this page was a "theme" section of the sandbox was one I had not considered - it describes itself, and seems to be generally understood, as permanent (both in it's existence, and in the existence of the content on it (only as permanent as any wiki page, of course)), located in the Sandbox simply so they could escape scrutiny.
          • The idea that it represents a sort of "themed area" for test edits is one I had not imagined. While on the face of it, this seems fine, when looked at carefully, it makes no sense. The content of test edits, by their very nature (as tests of the editing software and formatting options), doesn't matter, and so the idea of having themes for them is fundamentally contradictory. Thanks for the discussion! JesseW 02:20, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
          • P.S. As I think on this more, the idea that these subpages are a place for the same sort of test edits found on Wikipedia:Sandbox makes less and less sense. The Sandbox is blanked (other than a simple header) every few hours - do you really believe that the people who put in all the time and effort to create the layout of Wikipedia:Sandbox/Checkers(which I liked so much I copied it myself so the work wouldn't be lost if the page was deleted) would be OK with it being blanked out after a few hours. And if you claim that the checkers layout should be considered part of the Sandbox header - making the edits involved in making the moves the ones that are "test edits" I would point out that getting those edits right is quite difficult and would probably be beyond the skill of those who would be using the real Sandbox page. It just doesn't fly. Nice idea, though. JesseW 02:33, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, Wikipedia should not duplicate content if it can be avoided. Since we already have a sandbox and users can experiment with poetry on their user pages or subpages, this page is redundant. - Jersyko talk 15:30, July 25, 2005 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.